Rule changes mean players will not be penalised if slow-motion replays show
that their ball has moved but it was not reasonably discernible to the naked
eye

Golf’s rule-makers have sliced the influence of the armchair police - but have stopped short of ridding the game of these TV vigilantes all together.

The R&A and the USGA, the sport's two governing bodies, have announced that from the beginning of next year players will not be penalised if slow-motion, HD replays show that their ball has moved when at rest but that the “movement was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time”.

Tiger Woods and Padraig Harrington are just two of the players who will welcome this revision to the “Decisions on the Rules of Golf”. Woods was furious when being hit with a two-shot sanction at the BMW Masters in Chicago in September, whereas Harrington was disqualified in Abu Dhabi in 2011.

In both cases the players explained that they could not have been aware that their balls had moved (although in the case of Woods the saga escalated when he maintained that his ball had only “oscillated” despite the overwhelming TV evidence).

A few months after the Harrington affair, the rule-makers introduced a decision which allowed for players to be retrospectively penalised instead of being instantly disqualified for unwittingly having signed for a wrong score. This revision is another victory for common sense.

David Rickman, the R&A executive director of rules, was keen to point out to the Telegraph that they have been considering bringing in this decision for 18 months and that it was confirmed in late summer and, therefore, was not brought in as a response to the Woods penalty in Chicago. However, he did agree that if it happened again Woods probably would not be penalised in light of this decision.

Explaining how the “Decisions of the Rules of Golf” have changed since Harrington’s Abu Dhabi nightmare, after the Irishman had shot a first-round 65, Rickman said: “Padraig Harrington was disqualified from the Abu Dhabi Championship when slow-motion HD replays later showed that his ball had moved perhaps only a few dimples. He had broken the rules as they stood then and as it only came to light after he had signed his scorecard he was was disqualified as he had signed for a wrong score.

“In April, 2011, a decision was adopted which authorised committees to waive the disqualification penalty in circumstances in which the player could not reasonably have been aware of a breach that later was identified only through video evidence.

“In effect, it made it possible for a player to be retrospectively penalised. This decision takes it forward, so if the committee decided that Padraig couldn't have known his ball had moved then there would now be no penalty.”

While all the Tours will welcome these changes, the PGA Tour will likely feel that the R&A and USGA have not gone far enough in curtailing the power of eagle-eyed fans watching on their sofas. Earlier this year Tim Finchem, the PGA Tour commissioner, talked of the "difficult and awkward" nature of outsiders alerting officials to rules breaches and announced the Tour were studying the issue.

It is possible the Tour could instruct their staff to ignore what are generously called “inquiries to officials from TV viewers”. But it is clear from this joint press release from the USGA and R&A that any such policy would run counter to the rules. As far as Rickman, and his fellow members of the rules committee are concerned the viewers, should feel free to contribute their observations.

Rickman said: “It is our longstanding position that to reach a correct ruling, all evidence from witnesses concerning a possible breach of the rules should be considered, whether those witnesses are participants in the competition, non-participants such as spectators, or persons who have reviewed TV footage and the like.”

However, that is not to say that further changes will not be introduced in the near future. Indeed, Rickman revealed that as part of the rules review of 2016 - the next time the rulebook proper can be altered - they will be discussing other issues affected by TV technology.

“These include the necessary degree of precision in marking, lifting and replacing a ball, the estimation of a reference point for taking relief, and the overall question of the appropriate penalty for returning an incorrect score card where the player was unaware that a penalty had been incurred," Rickman said. “As is true of the rules in many other televised sports, adapting to developments in technology and video evidence is an important on-going topic.”

In all, “Decisions on the Rules of Golf, 2014-2015” contains more than 1,200 entries addressing specific situations under the rules of golf. A total of 87 changes have been made from the 2012-13 version: three new decisions, 59 revised decisions, one re-numbered decision and 24 decisions have been withdrawn. The R&A and USGA says this is part of their continuing commitment to provide greater clarity “to the rules to help make the game more understandable and accessible for players, officials and others who participate in the game”.

It is a much-needed process which, as this year’s mass of complicated rules controversies - at least four of which involved Woods, the world No 1 - have surely proved, has some way to go yet.